think your irony detectors are not sensitive enough in this case. I have of course no evidence for that sentence. It is pure speculation. In exactly the same way that LENR (induced by a special active environment) is pure speculation. Both hypotheses have the same merit - they explain the FPHE observations

One problem is that THHuxleynew appears to have made a variaton the Kirkshanahan theories.

His statement

"CCS errors from this cell of an ATER type would follow from the special active environment on

the electrodes created from the D electrolysis that allows ATER"

indicates causation via the expression "follow from"

Kirkshanahan never stated that the SAE caused CCS

Now THHuxleynew brings in irony detector... there is no irony here.

Also THHuxleynew cites pure speculation..... there is no speculation here,

What is here in this statement is CONFUSION and BABBLE .

THHuxleynew could not remember exactly what Kirkshanahan wrote in 2002, 2005 and cobbled together

what he could to make some kind of offthecuff expert-sounding response to answer my question at that time.

Another problem that arises is that THHuxleynew brings in the idea of MERIT.

Kirkshanahan's theories are not based on his calorimetry and electrochemical experimentation

An examination of his 43 papers from 1985 to 2017 shows colorimetry as the nearest thing!